IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Question on draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Sun, 02 April 2017 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD7F8129473 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 08:16:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.695
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.695 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SyoKagZ_TNYU for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 08:16:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [70.40.196.235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D45E4128C81 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 08:16:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 14109 invoked by uid 0); 2 Apr 2017 15:16:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw2) (10.0.90.83) by gproxy7.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2017 15:16:55 -0000
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmgw2 with id 3TGr1v00W2SSUrH01TGuhw; Sun, 02 Apr 2017 09:16:55 -0600
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=LIwWeNe9 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=AzvcPWV-tVgA:10 a=r77TgQKjGQsHNAKrUKIA:9 a=1sjgXBK7AAAA:8 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=Igm-X3-OErGU2H59aBIA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=rKrVYePj7rwA:10 a=pi3-yr8yO_zqpSwmd0MA:9 a=HCpUvJAvz56Vt7wt:21 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=qowbMnUzjQcM5iyYROrS:22 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Subject:References:In-Reply-To: Message-ID:Date:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=PL93i+YV4Yi1Jwc4AiCO7NSkCdbxFjeR9DOzKUfu7/U=; b=fnvoqVa6ek2sTNwmhnUdXk6Jeu Ic4JDCbPx065TUWt+n2Uy7SoRXhi+r6XaTFhiTFnNAsWHXrBOA+QyCCClmRMpLuhR6Qsqx9PIW+yB nljFmc87MYOOSKlFJN1+8kXho;
Received: from pool-100-15-84-20.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.84.20]:47238 helo=[11.4.0.6]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1cuhFL-0003p7-9D; Sun, 02 Apr 2017 09:16:51 -0600
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, rtgwg@ietf.org
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2017 11:16:49 -0400
Message-ID: <15b2f3d76e8.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <009201d2a8a2$2a9ac4c0$7fd04e40$@ndzh.com>
References: <009201d2a8a2$2a9ac4c0$7fd04e40$@ndzh.com>
User-Agent: AquaMail/1.8.2-216 (build: 100800200)
Subject: Re: Question on draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------15b2f3d78c227d27d33d09e35"
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.84.20
X-Exim-ID: 1cuhFL-0003p7-9D
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-84-20.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([11.4.0.6]) [100.15.84.20]:47238
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 1
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/7WQud5M3WbuOddsH0S2on8uyY5c>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2017 15:17:00 -0000

Hi Sue,

I took another look at bgp types and the only thing that jumps out at me as 
common that isn't already covered is enumeration of protocols  (for 
potential use in route redistribution and interface config).  We can 
certainly consider this if this what you were thinking about.

Are there are types you think we overlooked?

Lou


On March 29, 2017 11:41:25 AM "Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

> RTGWG DT:
>
>
>
> Just curious, did the DT consider BGP routing types?  If so, where did you
> decide BGP routing types were not common routing types?
>
>
>
> Sue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email